A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

groups of actors that feature on flashcards: the (i)
Union Parishad, (ii) community organizations/
citizens, (iii) traditional leaders/institutions (e.g. the
elite, religious leaders), (iv) government line agencies,
(v) private sector, (vi) support organizations
(NGOs).
Participants are invited to discuss these two questions:
1 Demand for good local governance: How well
is the citizens’ participation in regard to
governance?
2 Supply of good local governance: How well
does the local government function?
The evaluation of local governance issues, at both
the community and UP levels, takes place in
several small groups of maximum 8 persons (see
Key actors/stakeholders session as well). Such an
assessment is undertaken through a questionnaire
examining some “core governance issues” (20 for
the community LGSA and 28 for the UP LGSA,
organised into the demand and supply sides of
local governance). Once participants in each group
all agree on what the question means and what
the ideal situation would look like, they make their
individual ranking regarding the current situation.
The ranking is done on a common poster paper
on a score from 1 to 6. Table 27 provides
some examples of “core governance issues”
covered in the community questionnaire, and the
scoring system.
Once all issues are assessed, each group should
decide on a maximum of four issues that they
would like to see improved; these issues will be
further discussed with the other groups in order to
draw up a final list of priority issues that have to be
improved. At the community level LGSA, these
priorities can be expected to be improved either
by community groups or by the Union Parishad;
while, at the UP level LGSA, the priority issues
identified in the meeting will only be the
responsibility of the Union Parishad that is meant
to develop a Local Governance Improvement Plan
accordingly. Results from the community
self-assessment are expected to be presented to
the Union Parishad in order to be integrated in the
Local Governance Improvement Plan.
Key actors/stakeholders
COMMUNITY LEVEL LGSA: Participants at the
meeting should include: community Based
Organisations representatives, local business
people, youth, traditional leaders, ordinary citizens
(farmers, housewives, etc.), Union Parishad
member of the ward (as guest, not participant) and
Union Parishad women member of the greater
ward (as guest, not participant). It is recommended
to leave the invitation process to a CBO interested
in organising the citizens’ LGSA and not to any
member of the Union council. Facilitators for the
meetings are represented by community members
oriented and trained in advance.
Community meetings can be held at different
levels, at village, ward or greater ward level. The
meetings aim to give the opportunity to be
involved in assessing local governance functioning
to different actors and a wider public, particularly
those belonging to the most vulnerable groups.
UNION PARISHAD LGSA: Participants should
represent different actors at the Union Parishad
level: the Union Parishad chairman, Union Parishad
members and secretary, as well as some
representatives from community organizations,
the private sector and traditional leaders. One or
more Partner NGOs facilitate the meeting.
Gender focus
The LGSA strongly encourage the participation
of women in the decision-making process. In
particular, during the assessment’s phase concerning
the evaluation of governance issues, a particular
group for women is expected to be constituted for
both the community and UP LGSA in order to allow
them to express their opinions freely. Furthermore,
in the (community LGSA questionnaire, a
key question concerns the extent of women
participation in the UP meetings; while, in the UP
level assessment, specific questions are formulated
about the voice of women members in UP
meetings as well as the participation of women in
the decision-making of the village court and in the
coordination meetings.
Poverty focus
The participation of the poor and other
marginalised groups in the decision-making
118 UNDP Oslo Governance Centre